GUM based 737 ferried to CLE
 

Looks like N77295, a GUM based 737, was ferried to Cleveland last week. Does anyone know if this is due to a routine cycling of aircraft into and out of the GUM fleet, or would it be for some type of maintenance? Surprised at the 8+ hour flight it took from GUM-HNL which is ~1.5 hours longer in duration than normal for the route. I'm amazed that it has the legs to make the westbound trip HNL-GUM if the eastbound was over 8 hours!

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N77295

I wonder if anyone I know knows anything. CLE is a 737 MX base so it could be maintenance... so that would make some sense (but IIRC is not equipped for cabin reconfiguration and I would think SFO or LAX would make more sense for a routine visit.)

I'm not seeing a GUM-CLE on flightaware, but it's most recent flight was CLE-CLE wich based on flight path looks like a pretty typical maintenance flight.

If it was strictly a MX ferry the legs don't surprise me... No cargo, only 3 crew members and 0 passengers make for a very light plane...not sure how much further you could push one (without considering favorable winds) winds but 1.5 hours over normal really isn't that much more flight time than normal 121 alternate rules require anyway (not sure if UA dispatches ferries as part 91 or 121--if part 91 the regs get a lot looser)

Must be maintenance as flight plans have been scheduled to ferry it back tomorrow. Surprising that whatever was done to it couldn't be done in SFO or LAX.

The aircraft went GUM-HNL-SFO-CLE and is on it's way back tomorrow starting with with CLE-SFO scheduled as UA2762:

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...eb109e1ee0.png

could have had high level easterly winds. Not that uncommon for the tropics

Confirmed that it is maintenance. Seems SFO is inundated (not sure what LAX's 737 MX capabilities look like). Promised I wouldn't say more than that.

So you're telling me in theory I could take a 737 from EWR to NRT if I get my routings right? Sounds like a painful challenge.

Same energy

Virgin Australia is putting a 737 on Sydney-Tokyo

Yes, all on United metal even, not as they're ferrying it though (won't do a 737 west bound from HNL to GUM non-stop). But get yourself to the west coast via 737s (connect via a mid-con hub like ORD), take a flight to HNL. Take the island hopper to GUM and then GUM to NRT.

Sounds uncomfortable. But possible.

Why limit yourself to EWR for the 'western-most' point? You can tack on PDL and do it as, say, PDL-EWR-BOS-SFO-HNL-MAJ-KWA-KSA-PNI-TKK-GUM. 12.2k miles and 31 hours flying time on a 737. :eek: :D

Well, EWR-SEA is usually a 737, SEA-SFO is frequently a 737. I don't even want to know what the financial cost would be. For some reason I think they'd charge more than just a straight flight to NRT. And being SEA based, the positioning flight SEA-EWR would be on a 737.... so I'd go SEA-EWR-SEA-SFO-HNL-GUM-NRT... BRB, gonna price this out.

Uh, oh - Lost WIRunner ...

David

Okay, got distracted. BUT. I can't seem to get this to price out via multi city.

Straight EWR-GUM spends a lot of time on the 777 or 787, or ironically via NRT on the 737. EWR to the west coast is nearly always on a 777, with a sporadic 757 and 767. That just won't do. Kayak isn't returning any results either. I might need to use ITA to see what it is suggesting. The HNL-GUM segment is my issue now. I need to see when it is a 737 instead of a 777. Its funny that its sorta easier to get to GUM than it is BGR.

can you do PDL? The front cabin is O on the PDL leg and J the remainder of the legs